Like Apple doesn't copy. Now before you guys nit pick at the subtle differences. We're comparing the "look" of the devices which are >90% similar. Oh and if you didn't know, the phone on the left is the LG Prada released in 2007 just before the first iPhone was released.

Why don't you find a screen shot of the Prada or read the user manual as to how the touch screen gestures worked. That'll really open your eyes as to how different these phones really are (and how lousy the Prada really was).

Other than a black bezel and glass screen, that's where the similarities end. I'd say they were 20% similar.
Differences include slimmer design, single integrated button on the front, volume buttons on opposite sides and of different shape and composition, different antenna design, completely different dock connector.
Now why not show an iphone and a Samesung phone side by side, prior to all the legal action. Now you have you 90% similarities.

Yes but the Samsung is a copy of the first design which was LG's and not Apple's. They copied a copy and which is way more than a 20%. Where the buttons are does not effect the overall "look". If you want to nit pick, then the Samsung's button is rectangular, and there are two capacitive buttons on either side of it, the ear piece hole is almost twice as wide, the corners are less round, and other than the four icons on the home screen it looks very different.

"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX

Yes but the Samsung is a copy of the first design which was LG's and not Apple's. They copied a copy and which is way more than a 20%. Where the buttons are does not effect the overall "look".

You either haven't looked at the LG Prada, are just plumb crazy, or trolling (which doesn't mean you can't fall into the first two categories). Either way you are failing to make a single valid point and just coming across as delusional.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Not for legitimate companies. Sure, there are thousands of small time cloners and copiers - but they are routinely squashed. Heck, try to buy a fake Prada bag in NYC these days - not nearly as easy as it used to be. And the copiers aren't getting squashed because the police are on the take either

Quote:

So transmissions werent allowed to first shift into first gear and then into second gear, etc...

Sigh... just don't try to be clever or pedantic. It doesn't suit you.

Quote:

There's a natural progression to technology, and Apple has shown what that is with two devices, the touchscreen smartphone and the tablet computer.

Again, if it's so natural and obvious - why was Apple - the latecomer - the only successful vendor with tablets? And why do almost all tablets since look suspiciously like the iPad?

You keep claiming there is nothing special about the iPad but you can't answer this one simple question.

Think about that for a minute....

Quote:

Imagine if you will if nobody was allowed to copy Philips' flat panel TVs

A flat panel TV is less complicated than the touchscreen in a tablet - let alone the rest of the component hardware or software that is in a tablet. Nice strawman.

Now, if someone copied Phillips power supply, method for backlighting the screen, remote control design, or even layout or arrangement of the menus (more copyright than patent but check the owners manual - copyrights and patents are both asserted) their butts would get sued by Phillips.

No-name chinese knockoffs can get away with it, but big, legitimate companies like Samsung are going to get sued. And they are getting sued. And it's not going very well for them overall, despite a few injunctions not being granted here and there.

If you want to move beyond the soundbites and make an actual informed opinion about the real merits of these cases, I highly suggest you look into a site like http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/ that does more in depth analysis than cherry picking sound bites from sites like AppleInsider or Engadget. You tend to look less foolish.

You either haven't looked at the LG Prada, are just plumb crazy, or trolling (which doesn't mean you can't fall into the first two categories). Either way you are failing to make a single valid point and just coming across as delusional.

I sure did, an almost entirely black front and back, which makes up approximately 80-85% of both phones, other than the buttons both the LG and the iPhone are about 95% identical in that regard, then both have a silver/gray band around the side which makes up the remaining 15-20% of the phone and there they're 90% the same. I'm not a troll just a realist that calls a spade a spade.

"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX

Ummm have you tried a Galaxy Tab? Its dreadful, other than it slightly resembles an iPad, there's nothing much that Apple has to fear

Quote:

Originally Posted by DocNo42

Not for legitimate companies. Sure, there are thousands of small time cloners and copiers - but they are routinely squashed. Heck, try to buy a fake Prada bag in NYC these days - not nearly as easy as it used to be. And the copiers aren't getting squashed because the police are on the take either

You must look like a cop, there's Prada bags aplenty in NYC

Quote:

Originally Posted by DocNo42

Again, if it's so natural and obvious - why was Apple - the latecomer - the only successful vendor with tablets? And why do almost all tablets since look suspiciously like the iPad?

You keep claiming there is nothing special about the iPad but you can't answer this one simple question.

Think about that for a minute....:

Why is the iPad a success? Do I have to answer that question? This is where the user experience comes in and what Apple has mastered. People dont buy them because they look "cool" or "sexy" although it does help, but for the ecosystem Apple has created starting with the iPod. Thats something Samsung will never be able to copy. By the way the "latecomer" will learn from and not make the mistakes and missteps the others have made.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DocNo42

A flat panel TV is less complicated than the touchscreen in a tablet - let alone the rest of the component hardware or software that is in a tablet. Nice strawman.

Now, if someone copied Phillips power supply, method for backlighting the screen, remote control design, or even layout or arrangement of the menus (more copyright than patent but check the owners manual - copyrights and patents are both asserted) their butts would get sued by Phillips.

No-name chinese knockoffs can get away with it, but big, legitimate companies like Samsung are going to get sued. And they are getting sued. And it's not going very well for them overall, despite a few injunctions not being granted here and there.

If you want to move beyond the soundbites and make an actual informed opinion about the real merits of these cases, I highly suggest you look into a site like http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/ that does more in depth analysis than cherry picking sound bites from sites like AppleInsider or Engadget. You tend to look less foolish.

Remember we're here discussing the "look" of these devices, regardless of how these other companies built their TVs they still look a lot alike even up close. Tell me I'm wrong.

"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX

I know you a troll and your posts are absolutely ridiculous logic-wise most of the time, but this takes the cake.

How can a TV show from the 80's be "prior art" for anything other than other TV shows? You don't understand law at all do you?

Thanks for the laugh.

I know that you and your little minions, jragosta and Sector7g, are completely ignorant Apple-shill-trolls, but you could at least do a bit of (Google) research before attacking a completely valid post.

"_ _ _Apple argued that the flat glass surface disclosed in the D’889 patent,which is not present in the 1994 Fidler/Knight Ridder tablet_ _ _ _ Samsung has identified several prior
art references, including the 2002 Hewlett-Packard Compaq Tablet PC TC 1000 (“the HP Tablet”),which disclose additional features of the tablet that are related to the primary reference.The HP Tablet may serve as a secondary reference because it is related both in design and in use to the 1994 Fidler/Knight Ridder Tablet._ _ _ The HP Tablet contains a flat glass screen that covers the top surface of the tablet and a thin rim that surrounds the front face of the device. Thus, the main element that Apple argued was not present in the 1994 Fidler/Knight Ridder Tablet existed in the HP Tablet."

Yes but the Samsung is a copy of the first design which was LG's and not Apple's. They copied a copy and which is way more than a 20%. Where the buttons are does not effect the overall "look". If you want to nit pick, then the Samsung's button is rectangular, and there are two capacitive buttons on either side of it, the ear piece hole is almost twice as wide, the corners are less round, and other than the four icons on the home screen it looks very different.

Put the 3 phones in front of someone from the 1940's and ask them which two phones look the most similar. You're a complete moron if you think they will pick the iphone and the LG.

Well the thing is that the iPad was just an extension of the design philosophy used in iPod touch, infact a lot of people dismissed the iPad as just a big iPod toch in the begining. The iPod touch has been around in the look for 2-3 years before that. I still think that the joojoo's look was inspired by apple's product (probably the iPod Touch and iPhone), especally if you look at the scratchpad which was what joojoo looked like just a few months before.

None of the fandroids here want to accept the fact that it wasn't until the iPad2 was released and Samsesung got a look at it, did they publically admit they had to go back to the drawing board, because the Tab 10.1 they were set to release looked more like the ipad 1, than the iPad 2.

This is a known fact. Undisputed and in public record. Samesung redesigned the 10.1 AFTER seeing the iPad 2. Never mind the fact that the packaging, dock connector and icons are all rip-offs from Apple as well.

And who wants to bet that afterbthe new iphone 5 or ipad 3 is released and there is some major redesign, that we won't see a Samesung copycat shortly after that. I mean we have seen it with the ipod, phone, ipad, Macbook Air already. Why should Samesung spend money trying to create new products when they can just copy Apple. Apparently, this is perfectly acceptable to fandroids.

None of the fandroids here want to accept the fact that it wasn't until the iPad2 was released and Samsesung got a look at it, did they publically admit they had to go back to the drawing board, because the Tab 10.1 they were set to release looked more like the ipad 1, than the iPad 2.

This is a known fact. Undisputed and in public record. Samesung redesigned the 10.1 AFTER seeing the iPad 2. Never mind the fact that the packaging, dock connector and icons are all rip-offs from Apple as well.

And who wants to bet that afterbthe new iphone 5 or ipad 3 is released and there is some major redesign, that we won't see a Samesung copycat shortly after that. I mean we have seen it with the ipod, phone, ipad, Macbook Air already. Why should Samesung spend money trying to create new products when they can just copy Apple. Apparently, this is perfectly acceptable to fandroids.

Most companies did go back to the drawing board but Samsung was "kind enough" to give the world the Galaxy Tab 10.1V first and then release a revamped Galaxy Tab 10.1 to compete with the iPad.

The 10.1V is still stuck on 3.0 while the other Galaxy Tabs have been updated to 3.1. Samsung has said the Galaxy Tab 10.1 will get ICS (4.0) but no word for the other versions of the Tab. Can you imagine if Apple did that? People already bitch about the new devices getting OS features a 3 year old device isn't getting.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

No, but I think you can draw conclusions based on the overall marketplace offered by the laws/regulations inherent to it.

Even though the US has faltered and isn't the clear leader in innovation, there are still more new products and ideas emerging first in the US than other countries. In tech and software, look at revenues for companies based in different countries. To imply there isn't direct correlation is just silly.

My knowledge of the various legal systems is too rudimentary to enable me to draw such conclusions, but anyway, I believe that would be impossible, as innovation depends on many other factors.

The strongest argument you could use is to tell me that Steve Jobs could not have created Apple as it is now outside of the USA. I would accept this to be true, but not because of legal considerations, I believe.

For the rest, I can indicate that is is my view that Samsung is indeed a copycat, although this is of course up to your legal system to decide about this.

About the disregard for planet finance opinion, the statement may be too strong, but, as everybody noted, Apple stock is now more or less stagnating, four reasons which are hard to understand. Whereas a "normal" company would have taken long ago appropriate actions to remedy to this (dividend, split ...) everybody can see that this is not what Apple does, which is a good indication that this is not for them a top priority (although of course they are rightly proud of their mind blowing financial results).

Though you left this topic. By the way, can you help we with some opinions on Galaxy Note 8.9 (a middle-size one that makes phone call) against full-size Galaxy 10.1?

It's almost New Year, my bank manager who helped out my family business for 41 years is about to retire. The old fella need something bettr than a gold watch. With the Great Flood and economy being what it is, I am not supposed to fork out for iPad2, still around ฿24,000 from Bangkok scalpers and the official imports won't begin until January. Galaxy Note start at only ฿16,900 with Smart Cover replica. How good Galaxy tabs get now if all he does are Facebooking, emails and watching online TV, no apps and never carry it out of a house?

7-inch Galaxy no longer sold new in Thailand and Samsung now started with this Note model. Both of them comes with Samsung bluetooth keyboard if I go there before 26 Dec.

Depression does funny things to Thais you know. Especially this lifetime bean counter I am going to give him a present. i-products somehow acquired a stigma of being expensive an giving ones away for presents gives out a bad impression of being careless with your money. Samsung and Android handsets don't have such stigma.

Apple stuff being viewed in recession-hit Thailand as a blinged-up things and the owner being careless with money in the time everyone tightening the belt. Cultural quirk, yeah, but I live here and have to work with it.

Well the thing is that the iPad was just an extension of the design philosophy used in iPod touch, infact a lot of people dismissed the iPad as just a big iPod toch in the begining. The iPod touch has been around in the look for 2-3 years before that. I still think that the joojoo's look was inspired by apple's product (probably the iPod Touch and iPhone), especally if you look at the scratchpad which was what joojoo looked like just a few months before.

yes, maybe it was inspired by apple's product
I just reply to the guy who claim no tablet before the ipad have touch UI, black bezel, no button,....

(...it's only a matter of time before cooler legal heads around the world put an end to all this anti-competitve nonsense, and the consumer can decide what they want to spend their money on)

If you believe this is anti-competitive then you don't really understand the legal issues involved. Because it isn't (Apple doesn't care if you compete with them, only if you copy) and as these are patents related to trade dress there are the same 'you must protect' rules of play as a trademark.

And while this judge says "likely invalid" and "unlikely to cause harm" that is not an official ruling. When the official one comes down it could be very different.

Part of competing is defending your intellectual property in court. If you don't defend yourself everyone just copies you without doing any research of their own.

More to the point, if you don't defend yourself now you can't later.

Show of hands, how many folks here think aspirin is a generic name. Guess what, it wasn't always. It started off as a trademark name for a certain chemical formula of fever and pain reducer made by Bayer. Then then other companies made that same formula (more or less) and folks started calling them all aspirin and Bayer did nothing for months, perhaps even years. Then they decided to. And lost

Apple is playing a similar game. A game that requires them to play now or lose the right to play later. Even if they lose the case, they win points for trying. Not to mention appeals, which you know Apple will file.

And who knows, while line item by line item comes up with a few losses, Apple might be able to pull off an argument over the totality of common details and the timing of such details appearing.

Though you left this topic. By the way, can you help we with some opinions on Galaxy Note 8.9 (a middle-size one that makes phone call) against full-size Galaxy 10.1?

It's almost New Year, my bank manager who helped out my family business for 41 years is about to retire. The old fella need something bettr than a gold watch. With the Great Flood and economy being what it is, I am not supposed to fork out for iPad2, still around ฿24,000 from Bangkok scalpers and the official imports won't begin until January. Galaxy Note start at only ฿16,900 with Smart Cover replica. How good Galaxy tabs get now if all he does are Facebooking, emails and watching online TV, no apps and never carry it out of a house?

7-inch Galaxy no longer sold new in Thailand and Samsung now started with this Note model. Both of them comes with Samsung bluetooth keyboard if I go there before 26 Dec.

Depression does funny things to Thais you know. Especially this lifetime bean counter I am going to give him a present. i-products somehow acquired a stigma of being expensive an giving ones away for presents gives out a bad impression of being careless with your money. Samsung and Android handsets don't have such stigma.

Apple stuff being viewed in recession-hit Thailand as a blinged-up things and the owner being careless with money in the time everyone tightening the belt. Cultural quirk, yeah, but I live here and have to work with it.

ROTFLMAO. Go ahead and get the Galaxy if you want to send the following message:
"Sure, you worked here for 41 years and were an invaluable part of the team. We greatly appreciate your efforts and contribution, but not enough to give you a quality product when we can save a couple hundred dollars by giving you a cheap knockoff that doesn't work as well and isn't as useful".

Great message for a long time employee.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

Show of hands, how many folks here think aspirin is a generic name. Guess what, it wasn't always. It started off as a trademark name for a certain chemical formula of fever and pain reducer made by Bayer. Then then other companies made that same formula (more or less) and folks started calling them all aspirin and Bayer did nothing for months, perhaps even years. Then they decided to. And lost

Apple is playing a similar game. A game that requires them to play now or lose the right to play later. Even if they lose the case, they win points for trying. Not to mention appeals, which you know Apple will file.

And who knows, while line item by line item comes up with a few losses, Apple might be able to pull off an argument over the totality of common details and the timing of such details appearing.

More to the point, if you don't defend yourself now you can't later. . .

Apple is playing a similar game. A game that requires them to play now or lose the right to play later. Even if they lose the case, they win points for trying. Not to mention appeals, which you know Apple will file.

CharlieTuna, patents don't have a use-it-or-lose-it aspect. Apple could sit back silently for years, allowing supposed IP violations to go on at the competition before finally filing lawsuits.

You might be confused with US trademark law which requires a response within a set timeframe once a company is aware of infringement, or take the chance of losing the rights to the trademark. Not at all the same rules with patents.

Face to face the iPhone and Samsung look most similar, 360° the LG and iPhone look most similar.

Uh, 360° is still the same view, genius.

But, i think you were trying to say looking at the back side of the phones? In which case, you need some new glasses. Here is the back side of the lg prada and iphone 1st gen. 4th gen looks nothing like it either. Thanks for playing.

Like Apple doesn't copy. Now before you guys nit pick at the subtle differences. We're comparing the "look" of the devices which are >90% similar. Oh and if you didn't know, the phone on the left is the LG Prada released in 2007 just before the first iPhone was released.

fandroids keep showing this eventhough the working iPhone was shown before this. Get your facts straight before posting lies.

I'm under the impression photos, not CGI, was released in mid December 2006, about 2.5-3 weeks before the iPhone was demoed. Of course LG didn't demo their device until much later, Apple would have ad a working model of the iPhone to display long before mid December, and the LG Prada's claim to fame is that was the first capacitance-touch smartphone on the market though it only had a pointless single input sensor.

But all that is moot. There is no way Apple or LG could have copied each other in short a short time frame unless you subscribe to a theory that they inside spies. THe only thing LG seems to have done is be aware that Apple was announcing and iPhone at MacWorld (like we all knew) and decided to announce their unfinished product before CES and rush to market so they could get a "me first" claim.

It's clear it worked in some regard as trolls are using it to say Samsung didn't blatantly copy the iPhone, but saying "me first" isn't the same as making sales, which LG clearly has failed at in this space.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

So now the claim is that LG owns the rights to a two tone color scheme despite the devices neither looking alike nor mimicking the iPhone in any other way. You let us know when LG files a lawsuit against Apple's for the iPhone 4/4S; though even you could get your GED, get a college degree, get law degree, and pass the bar making you a bona fide patent attorney so you can finally have an idea of what is being discussed when the adults talk before LG will make such a foolish attempt to claim that a two-tone scheme is theres.

It's really amazing you think these look the same. At least learn to put a little thought into your trolling.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

So now the claim is that LG owns the rights to a two tone color scheme despite the devices neither looking alike nor mimicking the iPhone in any other way. You let us know when LG files a lawsuit against Apple's for the iPhone 4/4S; though even you could get your GED, get a college degree, get law degree, and pass the bar making you a bona fide patent attorney so you can finally have an idea of what is being discussed when the adults talk before LG will make such a foolish attempt to claim that a two-tone scheme is theres.

It's really amazing you think these look the same. At least learn to put a little thought into your trolling.

Clearly the original iPhone does not infringe on the Prada.

Apple waited until the i4 before it copied the Prada. These FanTards are out of their freaking minds.